Critical elements of international academic partnerships in orthopaedic surgery: a modified Delphi approach.

Background: Despite the recent emphasis on promoting international collaborations within orthopaedic surgery, criteria for determining the strengths of such partnerships has not been established. The purpose of this study was to evaluate orthopaedic experts' perceptions of the most valuable characteristics of international academic partnerships. Methods: This study was conducted using a modified Delphi methodology. Experts were identified through the Consortium of Orthopaedic Academic Traumatologists (COACT). Responses were collected from February to September 2022. Three rounds of surveys listing possible topics on a 5-point Likert scale were used to develop consensus among a group of experts. Consensus criteria for topic inclusion in the final scale was determined as a rating of "strongly agree" or "agree" by ≥70% of the participants in the third survey. Results: The Round 1 survey was distributed to 96 invited participants within the COACT network, of which 50 experts (52.1%) completed the first survey. Consensus was reached on 54 topics organized into the following 5 categories: Research, Advocacy/Leadership, Training/Surgical Skills, Education/Knowledge Exchange, and Sustainability and Safety (RATES Criteria). Conclusions: Determining the most valuable characteristics of successful international academic partnerships can lead to more sustainable, mutually beneficial collaborations. The criteria identified in this study can provide the foundation for developing new partnerships and assessing existing ones.

An Analysis of Participant Preferences Regarding Virtual Versus In-person Format of Orthopaedic Surgery Educational Materials in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

INTRODUCTION: The University of California, San Francisco Institute for Global Orthopaedics and Traumatology Surgical Management and Reconstructive Training (SMART) course has instructed orthopaedic surgeons from low-resource countries on soft-tissue reconstruction. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the course was conducted in-person; however, it was transitioned to a virtual format during the pandemic. The aim of this study was to determine participant preferences regarding a virtual or in-person SMART course format. METHODS: Survey data were collected via e-mail after each SMART course using RedCap or Qualtrics. Statistical analyses were conducted using Stata. RESULTS: There were 247 survey respondents from 44 countries representing all world regions, with Africa (125, 51%) the most represented. Of those who attended both an in-person and virtual course, most (82%) preferred the in-person format. In addition, all measured course outcomes were significantly better for participants attending the in-person course. The most common reason for not attending an in-person course was the cost of travel (38, 51%). DISCUSSION: This study demonstrated a preference toward in-person learning for the SMART course. In addition, those surgeons participating in the in-person course endorsed increased positive outcomes from the course. Increased emphasis should be placed on in-person surgical skills training for low-resource surgeons.

Estimating the economic impact of complications after open tibial fracture: A secondary analysis of the pilot Gentamicin Open Tibia trial (pGO-Tibia).

Objectives: To estimate the indirect economic impact of tibial fractures and their associated adverse events (AEs) in Tanzania. Design: A secondary analysis of the pilot Gentamicin Open (pGO)-Tibia randomized control trial estimating the indirect economic impact of suffering an AE, defined as a fracture-related infection (FRI) and/or nonunion, after an open tibial fracture in Tanzania. Setting: The pGO-Tibia trial was conducted from November 2019 to August 2021 at the Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Patients/Participants: One hundred adults with open tibial shaft fractures participated in this study. Intervention: Work hours were compared between AE groups. Cost data were analyzed using a weighted-average hourly wage and converted into purchasing power parity-adjusted USD. Main Outcome Measurements: Indirect economic impact was analyzed from the perspective of return to work (RTW), lost productivity, and other indirect economic and household costs. RTW was analyzed using a survival analysis. Results: Half of patients returned to work at 1-year follow-up, with those experiencing an AE having a significantly lower rate of RTW. Lost productivity was nearly double for those experiencing an AE. There was a significant difference in the mean outside health care costs between groups. The total mean indirect cost was $2385 with an AE, representing 92% of mean annual income and an increase of $1195 compared with no AE. There were significantly more patients with an AE who endorsed difficulty affording household expenses postinjury and who borrowed money to pay for their medical expenses. Conclusions: This study identified serious economic burden after tibial fractures, with significant differences in total indirect cost between those with and without an AE. Level of Evidence: II.

Establishing Consensus on Essential Resources for Musculoskeletal Trauma Care Worldwide: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence that formalized trauma systems enhance patient functional outcomes and decrease mortality rates, there remains a lack of such systems globally. Critical to trauma systems are the equipment, materials, and supplies needed to support care, which vary in availability regionally. The purpose of the present study was to identify essential resources for musculoskeletal trauma care across diverse resource settings worldwide. METHODS: The modified Delphi method was utilized, with 3 rounds of electronic surveys. Respondents consisted of 1 surgeon with expertise in musculoskeletal trauma per country. Participants were identified with use of the AO Trauma, AO Alliance, Orthopaedic Trauma Association, and European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery networks. Respondents rated resources on a Likert scale from 1 (most important) to 9 (least important). The "most essential" resources were classified as those rated ≤2 by ≥75% of the sampled group. RESULTS: One hundred and three of 111 invited surgeons completed the first survey and were included throughout the subsequent rounds (representing a 93% response rate). Most participants were fellowship-trained (78%) trauma and orthopaedic surgeons (90%) practicing in an academic setting (62%), and 46% had >20 years of experience. Respondents represented low-income and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs; 35%), upper-middle income countries (UMICs; 30%), and high-income countries (HICs; 35%). The initial survey identified 308 unique resources for pre-hospital, in-hospital, and post-hospital phases of care, of which 71 resources achieved consensus as the most essential. There was a significant difference (p < 0.0167) in ratings between income groups for 16 resources, all of which were related to general trauma care rather than musculoskeletal injury management. CONCLUSIONS: There was agreement on a core list of essential musculoskeletal trauma care resources by respondents from LMICs, UMICs, and HICs. All significant differences in resource ratings were related to general trauma management. This study represents a first step toward establishing international consensus and underscores the need to prioritize resources that are locally available. The information can be used to develop effective guidelines and policies, create best-practice treatment standards, and advocate for necessary resources worldwide. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study utilized the Delphi method representing expert opinion; however, this work did not examine patient management and therefore does not have a clinical Level of Evidence.

A pilot, masked, randomized controlled trial to evaluate local gentamicin versus saline in open tibial fractures (pGO-Tibia).

Background: Open tibial fractures have a high risk of infection that can lead to severe morbidity. Antibiotics administered locally at the site of the open wound are a potentially effective preventive measure, but there are limited data evaluating aminoglycoside antibiotics. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of a clinical trial to test the efficacy of local gentamicin in reducing the risk of fracture-related infection after open tibial fracture. Methods: This study is a single-center, pilot, masked, randomized controlled trial conducted at the Muhimbili Orthopaedic Institute. Participants were randomized intraoperatively after wound closure to receive gentamicin solution or normal saline solution injected at the fracture site. Follow-ups were completed at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year postoperatively. The primary feasibility outcomes were the rate of enrollment and retention. The primary clinical outcome was the occurrence of fracture-related infection. Results: Of 199 patients screened, 100 eligible patients were successfully enrolled and randomized over 9 months (11.1 patients/month). Complete data were recorded at baseline and follow-up for >95% of cases. The rate of follow-up at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, and 1 year were 70%, 68%, 69%, 61%, and 80%, respectively. There was no difference in adverse events or any of the measured primary and secondary outcomes. Conclusion: This pilot study is among the first to evaluate locally administered gentamicin in open tibial fractures. Results indicate a rigorous clinical trial with acceptable rates of enrollment and follow-up to address this topic is possible in this setting.

Pilon fractures: Consensus and controversy.

Pilon fractures are complex injuries that require an individualized approach to treatment to avoid complications and achieve good outcomes. Staged open reduction internal fixation remains the gold standard for most cases to achieve anatomic articular reduction while minimizing soft tissue complications and infection. Careful preoperative planning based on computed tomography dictates the surgical approach for reduction. A subset of cases may be amenable to early definitive or provisional open reduction and internal fixation based on fracture pattern. In some cases of severe articular comminution where reconstruction is not possible, primary ankle arthrodesis may be a good alternative.

Delays in Debridement of Open Femoral and Tibial Fractures Increase Risk of Infection.

BACKGROUND: Infection remains a costly, devastating complication following the treatment of open fractures. The appropriate timing of debridement is controversial, and available evidence has been conflicting. METHODS: This study is a retrospective analysis of the SIGN (Surgical Implant Generation Network) Surgical Database (SSDB), a prospective registry of fracture cases in predominantly low-resource settings. Skeletally mature patients (≥16 years of age) who returned for follow-up at any time point after intramedullary nailing of an open femoral or tibial fracture were included. Patients were excluded if they had delays in debridement exceeding 7 days after the injury. Utilizing a model adjusting for potential confounders, including patient demographic characteristics, injury characteristics, country income level, and hospital type and resources, local logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the probability of infection with increasing time to debridement in 6-hour increments. RESULTS: In this study, 27.3% of patients met the eligibility criteria and returned for follow-up, with a total of 10,651 fractures from 61 countries included. Overall, the probability of infection increased by 0.17% for every 6-hour delay in debridement. On subgroup analysis, the probability of infection increased by 0.23% every 6 hours for Gustilo-Anderson type-III injuries compared with 0.13% for Gustilo-Anderson type-I or II injuries. The infection risk increased every 6 hours by 0.18% for tibial fractures compared with 0.13% for femoral fractures. CONCLUSIONS: There was a linear and cumulative increased risk of infection with delays in debridement for open femoral and tibial fractures. Such injuries should be debrided promptly and expeditiously. The size and international nature of this cohort make these findings uniquely generalizable to nearly all environments where such injuries are treated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Novel e-learning platform for orthopaedic training in LMICs: A descriptive review of the IGOT portal.

Background: While e-learning has been written about extensively within the context of orthopaedics in the United States, there are few articles describing e-learning initiatives geared towards low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). The Institute for Global Orthopaedics and Traumatology (IGOT) at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) developed the IGOT Learning Portal to meet this need. Methods: The IGOT Learning Portal was designed to address knowledge gaps in patient care by increasing access to high-quality orthopaedic education for surgeons and trainees worldwide. It offers 10 distinct, asynchronous courses, which are divided into a modular format. Course enrollment is free and accessible to any surgeon or trainee with a web-browsing capable device and internet connection. Results: There are more than 2700 registered users and 300 active learners enrolled in IGOT Learning Portal courses. The Surgical Management and Reconstructive Training (SMART) program is the most commonly taken course. Learners represent 32 different countries across six continents. The IGOT portal also has surgical videos available on YouTube. The IGOT Portal YouTube channel has over 2000 subscribers and over 143,000 total views. Conclusions: The IGOT Learning Portal is an innovative approach to address the global disparity in orthopaedic trauma care by improving access to high-quality surgical education for surgeons and trainees both in the US and internationally. The development of an interactive online forum may be a beneficial addition to the Portal. Future directions include assessing content retention, participant interaction, and expanding existing content to other orthopaedic subspecialties.

GO-Tibia: a masked, randomized control trial evaluating gentamicin versus saline in open tibia fractures.

BACKGROUND: The rate of open tibia fractures is rapidly increasing across the globe due to a recent rise in road traffic accidents, predominantly in low- and low-middle-income countries. These injuries are orthopedic emergencies associated with infection rates as high as 40% despite the use of systemic antibiotics and surgical debridement. The use of local antibiotics has shown some promise in reducing the burden of infection in these injuries due to increasing local tissue availability; however, no trial has yet been appropriately powered to evaluate for definitive evidence and the majority of current studies have taken place in a high-resource countries where resources and the bio-burden may be different. METHODS: This is a prospective randomized, masked, placebo-controlled superiority trial designed to evaluate the efficacy of locally administered gentamicin versus placebo in the prevention of fracture-related infection in adults (age > 18 years) with primarily closeable Gustillo-Anderson class I, II, and IIIA open tibia fractures. Eight hundred ninety patients will be randomized to receive an injection of either gentamicin (treatment group) or saline (control group) at the site of their primarily closed open fracture. The primary outcome will be the occurrence of a fracture-related infection occurring during the course of the 12-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: This study will definitively assess the effectiveness of local gentamicin for the prevention of fracture-related infections in adults with open tibia fractures in Tanzania. The results of this study have the potential to demonstrate a low-cost, widely available intervention for the reduction of infection in open tibia fractures. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05157126. Registered on December 14, 2021.

Transfemoral amputation and prosthesis provision in Tanzania: Patient and provider perspectives.

Background: The burden of disability because of traumatic limb amputation, particularly transfemoral amputation (TFA) is disproportionately carried by low- and middle-income countries. The need for improved access to prosthesis services in these settings is well-documented, but perspectives on the burden imposed by TFA and the challenges associated with subsequent prosthesis provision vary among patients, caregivers and healthcare providers. Objectives: To examine the burden of TFA and barriers to prosthesis provision as perceived by patient, caregiver and healthcare professional, at a single tertiary referral hospital in Tanzania. Method: Data were collected from five patients with TFA and four caregivers recruited via convenience sampling, in addition to 11 purposively sampled healthcare providers. All participants participated in in-depth interviews regarding their perceptions of amputation, prostheses and underlying barriers to improving care for persons with TFA in Tanzania. A coding schema and thematic framework were established from interviews using inductive thematic analysis. Results: All participants noted financial and psychosocial burdens of amputation, and perceived prostheses as an opportunity for return to normality and independence. Patients worried about prosthesis longevity. Healthcare providers noted significant obstacles to prosthesis provision, including infrastructural and environmental barriers, limited access to prosthetic services, mismatched patient expectations and inadequate coordination of care. Conclusion: This qualitative analysis identifies factors influencing prosthesis-related care for patients with TFA in Tanzania which are lacking in the literature. Persons with TFA and their caregivers experience numerous hardships exacerbated by limited financial, social and institutional support. Contribution: This qualitative analysis informs future directions for research into improving prosthesis-related care for patients with TFA in Tanzania.

Opportunities for International Orthopaedic Volunteerism: An Exploration of United States and Canada-Based Nonprofit Organizations.

BACKGROUND: In low and middle-income countries (LMICs), there are often not enough orthopaedic surgeons to treat musculoskeletal conditions. International volunteerism is 1 way that the orthopaedic community seeks to meet this need. This study explored the opportunities available for orthopaedic surgeons to volunteer overseas as offered by nonprofit organizations in the United States and Canada. METHODS: A systematic internet search was conducted using 2 distinct search strategies. A website was considered a "hit" if it was that of a U.S. or Canada-based nonprofit, volunteer, or non-governmental organization that had opportunities for international orthopaedic volunteerism. Duplicate hits were eliminated to identify distinct organizations. Data regarding the work and geographical reach of the organization, as well as changes to its volunteer programs as a result of COVID-19, were extracted from each hit. RESULTS: Of the 38 distinct organizations identified in the U.S. and Canada, the most common orthopaedic subspecialties represented were pediatrics (37%), hand (24%), and arthroplasty (18%). Foot and ankle (4 organizations; 11%), sports medicine (2 organizations; 5%), and oncology (1 organization; 3%) were the least represented subspecialities. The most common regions for volunteer trips included Latin America and the Caribbean, followed by West and East Africa. Twelve organizations (32%) were identified as having a religious affiliation. For most organizations, the trip duration was a minimum of 1 week. All volunteer organizations included operative or clinical experiences as part of their trips, and the majority of organizations (58%) reported that their trips included opportunities for training local surgeons. Many organizations (71%) reported having resumed trips after halting them during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Many opportunities exist for orthopaedic surgeons to volunteer their time and skills abroad. Future directions for the improvement of international volunteer efforts among the orthopaedic community could include expanding the number of existing volunteer opportunities and assessing the ethics, safety, efficacy, and longevity of these programs.

Orthopaedic trauma observerships in North America for international surgeons: the visitors' perspective.

International observerships are one of many efforts aimed at addressing disparities in orthopaedic trauma care globally. However, their impact on visiting surgeons and their home countries, as well as the challenges faced by participating surgeons, are not well-documented. Methods: A survey was distributed to overseas surgeons who participated in an orthopaedic trauma observership from 2009 to 2020. Surgeons were identified through North American institutions previously recognized by the authors as having hosted international observerships. Information gathered included participant demographics, details of and perceived impact of the observership, and barriers faced before, during, and after the program. Responses from 148 international surgeons (ISs) from 49 countries were analyzed. Results: Sixty percent of observerships were at academic programs, 57% lasted 1-3 months, and 60% were self-funded. Participants identified cost and housing as primary barriers. After completing their observership, lack of funding, equipment and support staff, and excessive workload prevented participants from implementing changes at their clinical practice. Most observers believed that they gained relevant clinical (89%) and surgical knowledge (67%) and developed a professional network of North American hosts (63%). The most common suggested changes to the observership were greater hands-on experience in the operating room and structured goal setting relevant to the visiting surgeon. Conclusions: Visiting surgeons find North American orthopaedic trauma observerships helpful in improving their surgical and clinical skills. However, financial constraints and resource limitations at their clinical practice and limited operative experience during the observership present barriers to maximizing this clinical experience. To enhance the relevance of clinical observerships for ISs and impact global orthopaedic trauma care, the unique needs and challenges facing ISs must be addressed. Level of Evidence: IV-Cross-Sectional Study.

Evidence for Local Antibiotics in the Prevention of Infection in Orthopaedic Trauma.

Prevention of fracture-related infection (FRI) remains a substantial challenge in orthopaedic trauma care. There is evolving evidence to support the use of local antibiotics for both the prevention and treatment of musculoskeletal infection. Local antibiotics can achieve higher local tissue concentrations with a lower risk of systemic complications compared to intravenously administered antibiotics. These antibiotics may be administered in powder or liquid form without carrier, or if sustained release is desired, using a carrier. Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), ceramics, and hydrogels are examples of antibiotic carriers. Unlike PMMA, ceramics and hydrogels have the advantage of not requiring a second surgery for removal. The VANCO trial supported the use of powdered vancomycin in high-risk fracture cases for the reduction of Gram-positive infections; although, data is limited. Future studies will evaluate the use of aminoglycoside antibiotics to address Gram-negative infection prevention. While theoretical concerns exist with the use of local antibiotics, available studies suggest local antibiotics are safe with a low-risk of adverse effects.

Outcomes of Intramedullary Nailing and External Fixation of Open Tibial Fractures: Three to Five-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: While surgeons in low and middle-income countries have increasing experience with intramedullary nailing (IMN), external fixation (EF) continues to be commonly used for the management of open tibial fractures. We examined outcomes with extended follow-up of the participants enrolled in a clinical trial comparing these treatments. METHODS: Adults who were ≥18 years old with acute AO/OTA type-42 open tibial shaft fractures were randomly assigned to statically locked, hand-reamed IMN or uniplanar EF. These participants were reevaluated 3 to 5 years after treatment. The primary outcome was death or reoperation for the treatment of deep infection, nonunion, or malalignment. Unresolved complications such as persistent fracture-related infection, nonunion, or malalignment were collected and analyzed. Secondary outcomes included the EuroQol-5 Dimension-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire, the Function IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) score, radiographic alignment, and the modified Radiographic Union Scale for Tibial fractures (mRUST). RESULTS: Of the originally enrolled 240 participants,126 (67 managed with IMN and 59 managed with EF) died or returned for follow-up at a mean of 4.0 years (range, 2.9 to 5.2 years). Thirty-two composite primary events occurred, with rates of 23.9% and 27.1% in the IMN and EF groups, respectively. Six of these events (3 in the IMN group and 3 in the EF group) were newly detected after the original 1-year follow-up. Unresolved complications in the form of chronic fracture-related infection or nonunion were present at long-term follow-up in 25% of the participants who sustained a primary event. The EQ-5D-3L index scores were similar between the 2 groups and only returned to preinjury levels after 1 year among patients without complications or those whose complications resolved. CONCLUSIONS: This observational study extended follow-up for a clinical trial assessing IMN versus EF for the treatment of open tibial fractures in sub-Saharan Africa. At a mean of 4 years after injury, fracture-related infection and nonunion became chronic conditions in nearly a quarter of the participants who experienced these complications, regardless of reintervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Establishing Sustainable Arthroscopy Capacity in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs) through High-Income Country/LMIC Partnerships: A Qualitative Analysis.

Disparities exist in treatment modalities, including arthroscopic surgery, for orthopaedic injuries between high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Arthroscopy training is a self-identified goal of LMIC surgeons to meet the burden of musculoskeletal injury. The aim of this study was to determine the necessary "key ingredients" for establishing arthroscopy centers in LMICs in order to build capacity and expand training in arthroscopy in lower-resource settings. Methods: This study utilized semi-structured interviews with orthopaedic surgeons from both HICs and LMICs who had prior experience establishing arthroscopy efforts in LMICs. Participants were recruited via referral sampling. Interviews were qualitatively analyzed in duplicate via a coding schema based on repeated themes from preliminary interview review. Subgroup analysis was conducted between HIC and LMIC respondents. Results: We identified perspectives shared between HIC and LMIC stakeholders and perspectives unique to 1 group. Both groups were motivated by opportunities to improve patients' lives; the LMIC respondents were also motivated by access to skills and equipment, and the HIC respondents were motivated by teaching opportunities. Key ingredients identified by both groups included an emphasis on teaching and the need for high-cost equipment, such as arthroscopy towers. The LMIC respondents reported single-use materials as a key ingredient, while the HIC respondents reported local champions as crucial. The LMIC respondents cited the scarcity of implants and shaver blades as a barrier to the continuity of arthroscopy efforts. Conclusions: Incorporation of the identified key ingredients, along with leveraging the motivations of the host and the visiting participant, will allow future international arthroscopy partnerships to better match proposed interventions with the host-identified needs. Clinical Relevance: Arthroscopy is an important tool for treatment of musculoskeletal injury. Increasing access to arthroscopy is an important goal to achieve greater equity in musculoskeletal care globally. Developing successful partnerships between HICs and LMICs to support arthroscopic surgery requires sustained relationships that address local needs.

Public Insurance Payment Does Not Compensate Hospital Cost for Care of Long-Bone Fractures Requiring Additional Surgery to Promote Union.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the total hospital costs associated with the treatment of lower extremity long-bone fracture aseptic and septic unhealed fracture, to determine if insurance adequately covers these costs, and to examine whether insurance type correlates with barriers to accessing care. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic Level II trauma center. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing operative treatment of OTA/AO classification 31, 32, 33, 41, 42, and 43 fractures between 2012 and 2020 at a single Level II trauma center with minimum of 1-year follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the total cost of treatment for all hospital-based episodes of care. Distance traveled from primary residence was measured as a surrogate for barriers to care. RESULTS: One hundred seventeen patients with uncomplicated fracture healing, 82 with aseptic unhealed fracture, and 44 with septic unhealed fracture were included in the final cohort. The median cost of treatment for treatment of septic unhealed fracture was $148,318 [interquartile range(IQR) 87,241-256,928], $45,230 (IQR 31,510-68,030) for treatment of aseptic unhealed fracture, and $33,991 (IQR 25,609-54,590) for uncomplicated fracture healing. The hospital made a profit on all patients with commercial insurance, but lost money on all patients with public insurance. Among patients with unhealed fracture, those with public insurance traveled 4 times further for their care compared with patients with commercial insurance (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Septic unhealed fracture of lower extremity long-bone fractures is an outsized burden on the health care system. Public insurance for both septic and aseptic unhealed fracture does not cover hospital costs. The increased distances traveled by our Medi-Cal and Medicare population may reflect the economic disincentive for local hospitals to care for publicly insured patients with unhealed fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Host Perspectives of High-Income Country Orthopaedic Resident Rotations in Low and Middle-Income Countries.

BACKGROUND: International orthopaedic resident rotations in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) are gaining popularity among high-income country (HIC) residency programs. While evidence demonstrates a benefit for the visiting residents, few studies have evaluated the impact of such rotations on the orthopaedic surgeons and trainees in LMICs. The purpose of this study was to further explore themes identified in a previous survey study regarding the local impact of visiting HIC resident rotations. METHODS: Using a semistructured interview guide, LMIC surgeons and trainees who had hosted HIC orthopaedic residents within the previous 10 years were interviewed until thematic saturation was reached. RESULTS: Twenty attending and resident orthopaedic surgeons from 8 LMICs were interviewed. Positive and negative effects of the visiting residents on clinical care, education, interpersonal relationships, and resource availability were identified. Seven recommendations for visiting resident rotations were highlighted, including a 1 to 2-month rotation length; visiting residents at the senior training level; site-specific prerotation orientation with an emphasis on resident attitudes, including the need for humility; creation of bidirectional opportunities; partnering with institutions with local training programs; and fostering mutually beneficial sustained relationships. CONCLUSIONS: This study explores the perspectives of those who host visiting residents, a viewpoint that is underrepresented in the literature. Future research regarding HIC orthopaedic resident rotations in LMICs should include the perspectives of local surgeons and trainees to strive for mutually beneficial experiences to further strengthen and sustain such academic partnerships.

Reliability of Modified Radiographic Union Score for Tibia Scores in the Evaluation of Femoral Shaft Fractures in a Low-resource Setting.

INTRODUCTION: The modified Radiographic Union Score for Tibia (RUST) fractures was developed to better describe fracture healing, but its utility in resource-limited settings is poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the validity of mRUST scores in evaluating fracture healing in diaphyseal femur fractures treated operatively at a single tertiary referral hospital in Tanzania. METHODS: Radiographs of 297 fractures were evaluated using the mRUST score and compared with outcomes including revision surgery and EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) and visual analog scale (VAS) quality-of-life measures. Convergent validity was assessed by correlating mRUST scores with EQ-5D and VAS scores. Divergent validity was assessed by comparing mRUST scores in patients based on revision surgery status. RESULTS: The mRUST score had moderate correlation (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.40) with EQ-5D scores and weak correlation (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.320) with VAS scores. Compared with patients who required revision surgery, patients who did not require revision surgery had higher RUST scores at all time points, with statistically significant differences at 3 months (2.02, P < 0.05). DISCUSSION: These results demonstrate that the mRUST score is a valid method of evaluating the healing of femoral shaft fractures in resource-limited settings, with high interrater reliability, correlation with widely used quality of life measures (EQ-5D and VAS), and expected divergence in the setting of complications requiring revision surgery.

Risk Factors for Delayed Hospital Admission and Surgical Treatment of Open Tibial Fractures in Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Open fractures, especially of the tibia, require prompt intervention to achieve optimal patient outcomes. While open tibial shaft fractures are common injuries in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is a dearth of literature examining delays to surgery for these injuries in low-resource settings. This study investigated risk factors for delayed management of open tibial fractures in Tanzania. METHODS: We conducted an ad hoc analysis of adult patients enrolled in a prospective observational study at a tertiary referral center in Tanzania from 2015 to 2017. Multivariable models were utilized to analyze risk factors for delayed hospital presentation of ≥2 hours, median time from injury to the treatment hospital, and delayed surgical treatment of ≥12 hours after admission among patients with diaphyseal open tibial fractures. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. Only 12% of patients used an ambulance, 41% were delayed ≥2 hours in presentation to the first hospital, 75% received an interfacility referral, and 10% experienced a delay to surgery of ≥12 hours after admission. After adjusting for injury severity, having insurance (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.96) and wounds with approximated skin edges (aOR = 0.37; 95% CI = 0.20 to 0.66) were associated with a decreased risk of delayed hospital presentation. Interfacility referrals (2.3 hours greater than no referral; p = 0.015) and rural injury location (10.9 hours greater than urban location; p < 0.001) were associated with greater median times to treatment hospital admission. Older age (aOR = 0.54 per 10 years; 95% CI = 0.31 to 0.95), single-person households (aOR = 0.12 compared with ≥8 people; 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.96), and an education level greater than pre-primary (aOR = 0.16; 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.62) were associated with fewer delays to surgery of ≥12 hours after admission. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital network and socioeconomic characteristics are associated with delays to open tibial fracture care in Tanzania. Reducing interfacility referrals and implementing surgical cost-reduction strategies may help to reduce delays to open fracture care in LMICs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of prosthesis provision for patients with transfemoral amputation in Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: Limb loss leads to significant disability. Prostheses may mitigate this disability but are not readily accessible in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Cost-effectiveness data related to prosthesis provision in resource-constrained environments such as Tanzania is greatly limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of a prosthesis intervention compared with that of no prosthesis for persons with transfemoral amputations in an LMIC. STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients were prospectively followed up. Clinical improvement with prosthesis provision was measured using EuroQuol-5D, represented as quality-adjusted life years gained. Direct and indirect costs were measured. The primary outcome was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year, measured at 1 year and projected over a lifetime using a Markov model. Reference case was set as a single prosthesis provided without replacement from a payer perspective. Additional scenarios included the societal perspective and replacement of the prosthesis. Uncertainty was measured with one-way probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: From the payer perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was $242 for those without prosthetic replacement over a lifetime, and the ICER was $390 for those with prosthetic replacement over a lifeime. From the societal perspective, prosthesis provision was both less expensive and more effective. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated the ICER remained below the willingness to pay threshold up to prosthesis costs of $763. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest prosthesis provision in an LMIC may be cost-effective, but further studies with long-term follow up are needed to validate the results.